The invalidity of he claim that ''the probability calculations regardingprotein formation are wrong''

Since the greatest and most fundamental dilemma facing Darwinism is
that of the initial beginning of life, that is the subject that is
most troubling to Darwinists. Darwinists are unable to account for the
formation of a single protein even in the laboratory, let alone by
chance, and as alwaysthey resort to demagoguery as the easiest way
out.
Darwinists hide behind the idea that the probability calculations for
the formation of a single protein are "wrong." Even this just goes to
show how terrified Darwinists are at their inability to account for a
single protein .
It is true that the probability of an average, functional protein in
the human body forming spontaneously has been calculated as 1 in 10
950 .But even if there is an error in that calculations, as Darwinists
hypothesize, if the true probability were 1 in 10600or 10400or even
just 10100or 1060instead of 10950it would still pose an insoluble
dilemma forDarwinists. Because the probability in all cases would
still be ZERO.
But the point that reallyneeds to be emphasized is this: in terms of
protein, it is impossible to speak of any mathematical probability at
all. Because IN ORDER FOR PROTEIN TO FORM, OTHER PROTEINS MUST ALREADY
BE PRESENT. In other words, it is incorrect to employ the logic of "it
can only form with such and such a probability." Because protein
itself has to exist beforehand in order for protein to come into
existence. Andthis is a huge vicious circle for Darwinists.
Even if all the materials needed for protein, and all the amino acids
that represent the building blocks of protein, were all brought
together, no protein would still form in any way. THE PRESENCEOF DNA
AND PROTEINS TO PERFORM THE MANUFACTURE OF PROTEINAND FULLY EQUIPPED
CELLSto organize the process IS STILL ESSENTIAL.
In addition, 60 proteins are needed for a single protein to form, not
just one or two. Since these all have different functions, they are
all highly specialized.
It is unclear why Darwinists keep insistingon bringing up the fact
that protein and DNA areessential for protein to exist "has been known
to scientists for a very long time." It is of course something that
every scientist investigating the cell in the 21st century must know.
The important thing is not who discovered it, but that it represents
an insoluble dilemma for evolution.
It is therefore deceptivefor Darwinists to try to gain time by saying
"that calculation is wrong, but this one is right." No matter what
Darwinists claim, it is impossible for them to account for the
emergence of a protein, in other words, for the origin of life.
The fact that Darwinists are unable to account for a single protein
totally eliminates the theory of evolution. All false accounts
regardingevolution will all be invalid right from the outset.